Skip to main content

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking vs Step 3.7 Flash

Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

59

VS

Step 3.7 Flash

71

1 categoriesvs0 categories

Pick Step 3.7 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.

Category Radar

Head-to-Head by Category

Category Breakdown

Coding

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
69.9vs56.3

+13.6 difference

Operational Comparison

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Step 3.7 Flash

Price (per 1M tokens)

N/A

$0.2 / $1.15

Speed

N/A

N/A

Latency (TTFT)

N/A

N/A

Context Window

128K

256K

Quick Verdict

Pick Step 3.7 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.

Step 3.7 Flash is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 71 to 59. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Step 3.7 Flash gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 128K for Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking or Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 71 to 59.

Which is better for coding, Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking or Step 3.7 Flash?

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 69.9 versus 56.3. Step 3.7 Flash stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: June 8, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.